NY Times on Kerry: Liar!

[RGBVideo]

BEEP BEEP BEEP!

Post your anti-Kerry rants to the anti-Kerry -thread, please?

That is all.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ned
I charge Kerry with being anti-American because of what he did and said in 1970-71.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Plato, Bush is a rareity among politicians, a man of his word.

I can't believe you kept a straight face while writing that. Bush is a liar of enormous proportions. He lied about his tax cuts and who would be affected, he lied about his previous jobs (including gov of Texas), he lied about missile defense, he lied about 9/11, he lied about Iraq. His admintration has lied about Vicky Plame, the vandalism of the White House. They have acted to surpress the truth with the 9/11 commission, Iraq, government regulations, etc.

This administration is an enemy of the truth. Kerry seems to be also. The Dem's are making it real easy for me to vote Nader.

[GePap]

Only in so far as saying Bush present a singular vision 24/7 do I agree with Ned-certainly his admin. is single minded and policy consistent- but they are great demagoges and lie extensively to the public about their motivations, for if the people only knew what really motivated them, this admin. would have never come into power, and would most certainly not remain.

[mindseye]

Originally posted by Ned

Plato, Bush is a rareity among politicians, a man of his word.
(...)
I can think of no major policy where Bush said he would do one thing and then did another

Ned, man, you are f*cking priceless!

[Ned]

Originally posted by monkspider


Ned,

You're too blinded by hatred to see past the tip of your nose. You are afraid to face your responsibilty to other people, so you have created your own universe to hide in and you lash out at anyone who values love and brotherhood. Just know that your universe is a lonely place, and the sooner you can join the rest of us, the better. You just need to learn to value love more than hatred, and you will have great potential in this life.

Perhaps we who have lived what you know as history think differently because we experienced the consequences of the policy choices now being debated once again.

I think ill of Kerry and good of Lieberman. The difference is their policy choices on foreign affairs. In fact, there are famous Democrat politicians even a little older than me who knows just how good president Bush has been on fighting the war on terror. They include Koch, former mayor of New York, and Zell Miller, ex govenor and senator from Alabama. Had Lieberman been the Democrat nominee, perhaps they would have back this patriot rather that arch enemy of American security, Kerry.

[Ned]

Originally posted by oedo
Ned, you were in Vietnam?

No, I was drafted, but was declared 4f. Bad eyesight.

But I was there in the US the entire war and saw the politics of it. Johnson's strategy was simple. He would prevent a communist victory and constantly call for peace talks. The communists strategy was simple as well -- play to the anti-war movement and anti-war Congressmen until the US pulled out unilaterally because even though they could not beat the US, they also could not lose given Johnson's strategy.

Nixon essentially had the same strategy, but he pulled out our ground troops.

The reason the war went on for such a long time was the anti-war movement. They gave NV hope and caused them to delay, delay and delay some more as the votes in Congress to pull out (cut and run) kept growing larger. Guys like Kerry are responsible for tens of thousands of Americian dead. They killed them just as surely had they pulled the trigger themselves.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Monk
While I don't doubt that some politicians have a higher moral character than others, some of you guys are in need of a paradigm shift in your conception of politics. First of all, it should be about the issues much more than the candidates. Secondly, we need to accept that anybody who wants to hold a political office of great importance would have to have stabbed somebody in the back at some point or said one thing and done something else at another time. It's not pretty but it's inevitable because that's the way politics goes and the other side is doing it too.

I think it's tiring how people seemingly want to turn themselves into one-sided characters in every and all political debates around here. I can only imagine Ned's outrage if Bush had been a candidate for the Democrats. So Ned, do you even have a single viewpoint on politics that favours Democrats over Republicans? If yes, why we hear about that for a change? Vice versa, the same could be said for Sava and quite a couple others.

Monk, you, like many who live in the anti-Bush league, simple fail to listen. I supported Lieberman.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


I can't believe you kept a straight face while writing that. Bush is a liar of enormous proportions. He lied about his tax cuts and who would be affected, he lied about his previous jobs (including gov of Texas), he lied about missile defense, he lied about 9/11, he lied about Iraq. His admintration has lied about Vicky Plame, the vandalism of the White House. They have acted to surpress the truth with the 9/11 commission, Iraq, government regulations, etc.

This administration is an enemy of the truth. Kerry seems to be also. The Dem's are making it real easy for me to vote Nader.

Che, yeah sure.

I checked that anti-Bush, lie site. The first four or five stories of lying were on Cheney, Rumsfeld and the like. You really had to dig deep to find anything on Bush. But the stuff they accused Bush of lying about are so inconsequential as to be laughable. However, because they are so inconsequential, it is very hard to verify based on publicly available resources. So all we have is bald-face assertions by extremely biased people.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by mindseye

Ned, man, you are f*cking priceless!

He's actually right there, as GePap noted - they are very consistent on their policy

[Capt Dizle]

The Vietnam war ended a few years before I finished high school. But I was quite aware of the issues, having family and friends that fought in the war.

Many who speak of this time in America's history are speaking academically, which is fine. But this is a less emotional viewpoint. From my perspective, anti-war protestors like Kerry were regarded as filth by almost everyone I knew. My perspective is a southern suburban perspective. I am sure that in more urban, liberalized places those closely identified with the anti-war movement were highly regarded.

Revisionists have dieified many of these people, or at least tried to. The strong conservative movement of the last twenty-five years has blunted that and you can rest assured that as the American public becomes more focused on this election there will be a great groundswell of hostility towards Kerry because of his protest background and legendary bias against the military.

[Ned]

Originally posted by GePap
Only in so far as saying Bush present a singular vision 24/7 do I agree with Ned-certainly his admin. is single minded and policy consistent- but they are great demagoges and lie extensively to the public about their motivations, for if the people only knew what really motivated them, this admin. would have never come into power, and would most certainly not remain.

GePap, dismissing the lying part, it is good to see that at least someone on the left agrees that Bush will fight and fight hard for what he believes in.

[Ned]

Originally posted by mindseye

Ned, man, you are f*cking priceless!

Mindseye, I normally find you a reasonable person. In a thread about Kerry's lying, you now have gone off on me about Bush where even the most biased of Bush haters have to agree that he approaches issues with single-minded determination. That is one of the complaints the left has about Bush.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Che, yeah sure.

I checked that anti-Bush, lie site.

Not my link, man. I seperated out the lies of Bush and the lies of his Administration. I think he's responsible for those who work for him and lie, however, and he has created a permissive environment for lying. This is certainly one of the most dishonest governments we've had. I hope that whatever subsequent Administration comes to be has the cajones to investigate this Adminstration fully, and send those who need to go to prison to prison.

Why hasn't Bush asked his staff to sign an affidavate that they didn't leak Valerie Plame's name, nor do they know who did? Why has this administration thrown roadblock after roadblock in front of the 9/11 commission? Why has this administration been firing scientists who disagee with the junk science the Bushies base their policy on?

Hell, I doubt Bush even knows what truth is anymore.

[Ned]

Originally posted by jimmytrick
The Vietnam war ended a few years before I finished high school. But I was quite aware of the issues, having family and friends that fought in the war.

Many who speak of this time in America's history are speaking academically, which is fine. But this is a less emotional viewpoint. From my perspective, anti-war protestors like Kerry were regarded as filth by almost everyone I knew. My perspective is a southern suburban perspective. I am sure that in more urban, liberalized places those closely identified with the anti-war movement were highly regarded.

Revisionists have dieified many of these people, or at least tried to. The strong conservative movement of the last twenty-five years has blunted that and you can rest assured that as the American public becomes more focused on this election there will be a great groundswell of hostility towards Kerry because of his protest background and legendary bias against the military.

Bravo! jimmytrick. The people who were there at the time know that the likes of Kerry destroyed Johnson's and Nixon's ability to end the war through negotiations. It was only after Nixon was reelected in a landslide and he began an overwhelming attack on the major cities of North Vietnam did they finally accept peace.

The people who somehow think the country did not support our effort in Vietnam and that the likes of Kerry were treated as heroes are indeed living in a post-revisionist view of the world. However, it is true that Kerry, almost single-handedly, is responsible for the hostile reception of many of returning troops. He called them war criminals, baby killers and the like.

Kerry is the lowest of the low.